This just in from the Department of Emigration...

Micheal Moore, and the rest of the leftists in this country aren't taking the results of last week's election well. Not that that's a big surprise. Another non-surprise is that they just don't understand why they lost and who it was that oppossed them. Case in point, the following picture in on the frontpage or Micheal Moore's official website...

This little jem from the fevered mind of Mr. Moore encapsulates a two-for-one 'flaw in the theory'.

First, the redrawing of the map refers to the idea of Moore, and several of the other leftist talking heads, of having the "blue states" secede from the Union. The problem with that idea is, using the county-by-county map there are only three States that can be considered all blue. Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island. And they're so damn tiny, I can't make out clearly if they are, in fact, all blue. Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire are mostly blue. But most of Pennsylvania, New York, California, Oregon and Washington are are red, not blue.

Kinda hard for a State to secede along red-blue ideological lines if most of the State is made up of "reds". I'd still like to know how the color-codes changed. I guess the Democrats got tired of being exposed as Communists.

Anyhoo... onto the second problem with Mr. Moore's theory. Jesusland. Contrary to what Mr. Moore and those like him think, President Bush had more supporters than Evagelical Christians. I for one, am not an Evagelical Christian. Heck, I'm not even a Christian. I studied Wicca for, hmm, about a dozen years before becoming more of a non-religious spiritually oriented type of person. Granted, one of the problems I had had with then candidate Bush was the dustup over Wiccan soldiers being able to excerise their First Amendment rights. But I haven't seen anything to back up a fear of religious bigotry being inspired by President Bush's policies. Besides, thanks to the Second Amendment, I have the ablity to ruin the day of anyone trying to use me for kindling.

So on both counts, and heck, pretty much everything else for that matter, Micheal Moore is flatout wrong. He's once again playing fast-n-loose with facts trying to 'prove' a preconceived conclusion.

Well, at least he's consistant.